Jump to content

Talk:Novak Djokovic/Archive 8

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7Archive 8Archive 9Archive 10

wiki-markup comment beside singles ranking

There is a markup comment by the singles ranking stating, "- ALWAYS THE DATE WHEN THE PLAYER MOST RECENTLY OBTAINED THEIR CURRENT RANKING, DOES NOT NEED TO BE EDITED-". I am not sure quite what this means, it does not exist on other players' pages, and the ranking date has been updated every week for several weeks, so I'm removing this comment until someone explains it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PsyMar (talk • contribs) 18:10, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Well, I was under the impression that the date under "current ranking" is supposed to be the date the player obtained the current ranking... not a weekly tally when nothing has changed. Fyunck(click) (talk) 19:42, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
@PsyMar: Do not remove it, please. The comment is useful. It means that the date in the "currentsinglesranking" parameter should be the date the player achieved current ranking. For example, Djokovic has been No. 12 continuously since 6 November 2017, so the date should be "6 November 2017". @Dddenilson: Please, do not change the date without changing the ranking (as you did here for singles). There is a convention to always display the date on which current ranking was achieved. Vanjagenije (talk) 22:59, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
Thanks -- this is why I brought it up. It has apparently been removed, and the date changed, on other top players' pages, including Roger Federer, and I sensed either it shouldn't be there or someone wasn't understanding it. PsyMar (talk) 19:32, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Novak Djokovic. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:18, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Novak Djokovic. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:06, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 January 2018

change mediate to meditate change mediation to meditation 2601:648:8303:5388:B1A6:7F05:F396:2BC9 (talk) 18:57, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

 Done. Thanks, Gap9551 (talk) 19:33, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 May 2018

Please correct Novak Djokovic's current ATP standing from "18" to "22" in the first line of the article. The line should read:

Novak Djokovic (Serbian: Novak Đoković / Новак Ђоковић, pronounced [nôʋaːk dʑôːkoʋitɕ] (About this sound listen);[4] born 22 May 1987) is a Serbian professional tennis player who is currently ranked world No. 22 in men's singles tennis by the Association of Tennis Professionals (ATP).

thank you Lexmac (talk) 22:58, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

 Done with thanks, NiciVampireHeart 00:55, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 August 2018

Remove the line stating, "He is widely considered one of the greatest tennis players of all time". It's baseless as no citation or articles regarding the same have been provided. Abhay Tyagi (talk) 07:50, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

 Done Fyunck(click) (talk) 09:34, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Why shouldn’t we mention this in the lead section? Why should we mention Djokovic’s tally of 13 Grand Slam titles in the lead section? BoDu (talk) 10:32, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

The reason why the statement saying "he is one of the greatest tennis players of all time" was removed was because, as concluded in the talk page discussions in Talk:Roger Federer, Talk:Rod Laver and partially in Talk:Rafael Nadal, that statement was considered subjective for the lead. Since those statements were removed in Federer's and Nadal's articles (and this article earlier), it would be best to keep that consistency across other tennis articles, including this one, unless another consensus is established for that statement to be in the lead for every article. I have relocated it from the lead to the "Place among the all-time greats" section so that it is still in the article. Broman178 (talk) 16:59, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Montenegrin descent?!

Is this part really necessary? Except of course for ego of some insecure Montenegrins who want to latch on individual's personal successes. I mean it is clear from various statements both Novak and his father consider themselves ethnic Serbs and are part of Serbian Orthodox church and if anything they are emotionaly tied to Kosovo and Belgrade where they lived most of their lives, not Montenegro. Distance between his last relative living in Montenegro and Novak is three full generations not to mention back then you didn't have officialy ethnic Montenegrins just Serbs,Croats and Slovenes. Serbian and Montenegrin identity issue is very controversial topic and in modern times it is usually a matter of personal affiliation rather than any tangible difference because Serbians and Montenegrins are very intermixed and until 90s Montenegrins was for most something akin to regional label like say Texans rather than actual ethnicity. Since Montenegro became independent there are still debates about this in the country. There are literally families in Montenegro where grandfather declares himself Montenegrin Serb, father Montenegrin, one brother Montenegrin and other brother Serb. So considering Đoković family has firmly affiliated themselves with Serbian ethnicity it is safest to type instead of Montenegrin descent (which implies ethnicity) something like "his ancestors have origin in Montenegro" and avoid entire controversy altogether. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.149.17.207 (talk) 18:50, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

False statement

In a TV show ("Ћирилица") on October 1st 2018. Srđan Đoković, Novak's father was clear: We are Serbs from Montenegro, but from the Serbian tribes, my father and mother were Serbs. All in presence of Nikola Pilić. Please fix the nonsense - he(Srđan, his parents too) is not of Montenegrin origins. Watch the show after 1hr 52min and 10 sec. You'll hear from Srđan this: "Mi smo poreklom iz Crne Gore ali iz srpskih plemena Crne Gore i moj otac i moja majka su poreklom iz Crne Gore. To je za mene jedna zemlja i jedan narod i neka se svi oni odvoje koliko hoće. ... Zapamtite jedno (Novak je) i Srbin i srpskoga roda i uvek će to biti za svoju zemlju i svoj narod."--109.92.163.218 (talk) 10:07, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

 Done--Soundwaweserb (talk) 11:05, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

Novak Djokovic vs. Novak Đoković

Is there a reason why the name is given with its anglicised spelling and not the original? From a cursory glance at the Wiki articles for various former-Yugoslavian athletes, actors, etc. I couldn't find a single one whose article was titled like that. Cf. Marin Čilić, Janko Tipsarević, Damir Džumhur, Petar Kočić, Mohorovičić discontinuity etc.

Because that's how Novak spells it himself in all English sources, including personal websites. You'll have to ask him why he spells it that way. Fyunck(click) (talk) 18:03, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

Please, be so kind and change the surname of Novak into Đoković as it is given to him by his parents. It is an obligation of any organization these days to respect and follow the guideliness of General Data Protection Regulation where it is stated that everybody has a right to have corrected their personal data to original ones.Werkladder (talk) 09:55, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

No. GoodDay (talk) 15:50, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 January 2019

Like every other player or sportsman from Serbia, should use Serbian letters in Novak Djoković's surname. So instead "Novak Djokovic", should be Novak Đoković, or at least with "ć", Novak Djoković. Reljam (talk) 10:24, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

 Not done Proposals to change the title of this page have been rejected (see Talk:Novak_Djokovic/Archive_6#Requested_move_26_February_2015) because English language sources use the current title. Iffy★Chat -- 10:58, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

pic in 2011 season section

“We try to keep the pics at no more than 10. What we need are great pics of Djokovics forehand, backhand, serve, volley, return and a couple of others. More than that starts flooding the article)”@Fyunck

I don't think so, the pic in 2011 seanson section is very good for this article. 2011 WIMBLEDON is a significant tournament for Djokovic, it made him through to new grand slam final, and gain the new No.1. This great pic shows how excited he was. --Chinyen Lu (talk) 02:01, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

I thought it was poor, but to each his own. Find a different one to eliminate to keep the article in sync with Wikipedia Tennis Project. Fyunck(click) (talk) 02:06, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
Well, through searching I find nothing better than this pic. It is implicated to adopt it. Of course, you may change it into another better pic if you find any.--Chinyen Lu (talk) 03:13, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 January 2019

Change "uncle's" to "uncles" in the investments section 2A02:1811:D25:C00:F048:2BA7:A44B:D6AB (talk) 15:16, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: "uncle's" is grammatically correct. There is apparently only one uncle (per the prose in this section), and the word is possessive in this sentence. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:55, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 January 2019

Should say record 7 Australian open championships. 86.129.175.227 (talk) 11:06, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

 Done Gap9551 (talk) 16:04, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

Greatness

Hello, there's current discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tennis#New Guideline Proposal for "Greatest of all time" Mention in Lead Sections about adding GOAT/nicknames to lead sections. Feel free to add your thoughts! oncamera 00:27, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

Update to Section: Tennis Career, Subsection 2019

I don't have rights, but I would add this information if I did...

Novak retired from ther US Open in the 3rd Round against Stan Wawrinka; he was down 2 sets to none. This put an end to hp's defense of his Champion status in the tournament, and his chems to win his 17th Major title.

WaterMaltHopsYeast (talk) 03:17, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

There are a couple typos in that thanks to my phone: • "ther" should be "the" in the first sentence • "hp's" should be "his" and "chems" should be "chance" in the second sentence

Also, I put the semi-protected edit template in there but not sure what happened. Is it supposed to be in the Subject field not the body?

WaterMaltHopsYeast (talk) 03:22, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

It seems similar writing has already been added. Fyunck(click) (talk) 18:16, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 July 2019

His maternal side is Croatian, and his parental side is Montenegrin! 80.123.205.186 (talk) 11:23, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

His maternal side is Croatian, and his parental side is Serbian. There is reference. Best regards.--Soundwaweserb (talk) 17:15, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

That is true , Novak is a Serbian by ethnicity and by nationality

Saying his maternal side is Croatian is misleading and a shameless attempt by Croats to appropriate him. His grandparents, on both sides, are ethnically Serbian. They lived in Croatia, as did many hundreds of thousands of Serbs until ethnic cleansing in the 90's. This needs to be clarified in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.139.126.191 (talk) 02:30, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

ATP Cup victory 2020

Under "Team competitions", where Davis Cup (won in 2010) and Hopman Cup (finalist in 2008 and 2013) are listed, ATP Cup should be added as Serbian National Team won it on January 12th this year and Novak Djokovic was a part of that team. Suppzz (talk) 21:32, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

 Not done If you are talking the top infobox, the ATP cup is not a parameter of that table. It is too new, may not be here that long, and has no prestige yet. That may change of the coming years but we'll have to wait and see. Fyunck(click) (talk) 22:04, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
How does it not fit the parameters? It is a team competition, so by definition it fits the parameters. The ATP Cup had way more participation from top ATP players this year than the Hopman Cup has had in the last 20 years, so your argument is invalid. Furthermore, if a player wins an ATP tournament and then that ATP tournament no longer exists (for example the old "Serbia Open" and many others - look at defunct ATP tournament list), wikipedia and more importantly the ATP will still list that title on the player's resume/record as an achievement. Therefore, "prestige" and longevity have nothing to do with making this information available under "team competitions", and "prestige" is a personal opinion which is not something that should be part of the discussion for why or why not a FACT should be listed on wikipedia. The man won a team competition recognized by the ATP tour, whether you recognize it or not is immaterial, therefore it should be listed. I think this is a mistake and a decision made on one user's personal opinion and opinions should not be valued over facts on a public forum like Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lstanic (talk • contribs) 21:29, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
We don't put everything in the infobox... just the very most important items. We don't list his ATP 250 titles or his ATP 500 titles or even his ATP 1000 titles. That box is not for everything. Grand Slam tournaments and year end championships are huge and very prestigious. Olympics have a long history as does davis and hopman cups. So that's what we include. ATP Cup and Laver Cup are brand new and who knows how long they'll be around so they are not in the infobox. They are in the prose in the body of the article. It is also not one persons opinion. It was decided what to include by Tennis Project and even if you wrote it in the article it would not show up on the screen since the module written for all tennis article does not include it as an option. It would need to be rewritten to include the ATP Cup. Fyunck(click) (talk) 21:57, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
information Note: Closing this as  Not done per the above responses. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 14:58, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

RfC: Should the information about ethnicity and place of birth of Novak Djoković mother be part of the article?

Should the information about Dijana Žagar ethnicity and place of birth be part of article and "Early and personal life" section. Mikola22 (talk) 07:38, 6 August 2020 (UTC) At this point we have two confirmed sources on RSN as reliable sources. First is from 2006 and interview of Novak Djokovic in Croatian newspaper Slobodna Dalmacija, "I da mi je majka Hrvatica, iako je rođena u Beogradu, jer su svi njezini iz Vinkovaca i tamo imam puno rodbine...And that my mother is Croat, even though she was born in Belgrade, because all of her are from Vinkovci and I have a lot of relatives there".[1] And new Serbian Nova S source from 2020 in which father of Dijana Žagar, Zdenko Žagar (82), says "Ja sam po nacionalnosti Hrvat i rođen sam u Vinkovcima..I am a Croat by nationality(origin) and I was born in Vinkovci"... "Uvek sam govorio da sam Jugosloven ili Hrvat, Srbin nikad nisam bio. Dijana je rođena u Beogradu i tu je odrasla...I always said that I was a Yugoslav or a Croat, I was never a Serb. Diana was born in Belgrade and grew up there..Normalno je da će biti više priklonjen Srbima i ja nemam ništa protiv toga. Ne bi bolje prošao u životu ni da se predstavlja kao Hrvat. It is normal that he(Novak) will be more in favor of Serbs, and I have nothing against that. He would not have fared better in life if he had presented himself as a Croat.[2]

This RfC is only for information about the mother. Secondly we have one questions and one proposal.

1) Whether you want that information about the mother's ethnicity and place of birth be part of this article? Yes or No. 2) I suggest that new information based on two RS be "Novak's mother Dijana Žagar is a Croat, born in Belgrade." If you answered the first question No this means that you are also against proposal 2), and more detailed explanations are no longer needed. Mikola22 (talk) 07:38, 6 August 2020 (UTC)


  • 1) Yes Because I think that ethnicity and place of birth mother or father of some famous person ie informations from private life must be part of this or any other article. 2) I agree with this proposal because information is from reliable sources which we must respect. Mikola22 (talk) 07:40, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose - The information itself is not a problem, but we do not have the good sources. There was no consensus on the RSN. According to WP:BLP: Be very firm about the use of high-quality sources. All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be supported by an inline citation to a reliable, published source.
  • Slobodna Dalmacija may be reliable, but that does not mean that it is always neutral. (WP:NEUTRALSOURCE) I think we should find a Serbian reliable portal that states the same claim and also to find a English source that explicitly uses the term Croat and not to translate arbitrarily.
Serbian: Hrvat (Хрват) = ethnic Croat, citizen of Croatia; Srbin (Србин) = ethnic Serb, citizen of Serbia
Croatian: Hrvat = both ethnic Croat and citizen of Croatia; Srbin = ethnic Serb; Srbijanac = citizen of Serbia
Furthermore, this is source from 2006. (WP:AGE MATTERS) Djokovic is a world-famous star who is in the media almost every day, there would certainly be a huge number of reliable sources of recent date in many languages ​​for any important information about him. People can say all sorts of things about themselves, sometimes contradictory things. Any statements made by interviewees about themselves, their activities, or anything they are connected to is considered to have come from a primary-source and is non-independent material. (WP:INTERVIEW)
  • The Nova S interview is RS, but Djokovic's grandfather said that he has always declared himself a Croat or Yugoslav. That’s all we know about his maternal ethnic background. That should not be neglected. It is estimated that there are about 400,000 ethnic Yugoslavs today. If we cite one fact from the source, then we must mention other.

I’m sorry to repeat myself, but I didn’t expect to have another one discussion. Let it remain here summarized.--WEBDuB (talk) 09:24, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

The Nova S interview is RS, but Djokovic's grandfather said that he has always declared himself a Croat or Yugoslav. The source does not say "declared" source say "said" (I always said that I was). He could say (Croat-Yugoslav) as an officer of the Yugoslav People's Army in some cafe or in public. Otherwise you can’t be declared twice for the same thing and in the same time. That is why he clearly says earlier that he is of Croatian nationality ie ethnic origin. By the way, Josip Broz Tito declared himself a Yugoslav and in the article he is "Ethnicity Croatian". Mikola22 (talk) 11:14, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
I really think you're using the wrong comparisons. It is only correct to say that Josip Broz Tito had Croatian ethnic origin, but everyone has the right to declare themselves as they wish.--WEBDuB (talk) 13:22, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose - ethnicity of Djokovic's mother and the back-and-forth it causes are trivial. If we have a reliable source as to where she was born that would be ok to place in the article. But this is an encyclopedic article summary of Novak Djokovic... not his parents. You mention them of course, but most articles don't go into detail about the genealogy of parents and grandparents. That's way too trivial here. Fyunck(click) (talk) 10:13, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose - Since you are suggesting to put only his mother ethnicty, I find this information incomplete and that it also implies on something that Novak himself is not. Also we don't have enough RS (only the TV show on Happy TV was recognised as primary but RS on RSN) and as my last argument most of the newspapers in the region are not reliable source as you can see in this study made on Croatian, Bosnian and Montenegro newspapers [[3]] - It is said that for example (since you are using Croatian newspapers as source I am going to refer to a problem there) "by the rules of journalism it is required by news publishing that the author quotes at least 2 independent sources and for example some international media houses like Canadian Broadcast Company requires at least 3. In Croatia daily newspapers used only one source, and lots of the articles are used without sourcing. They had analysed 4 different daily newspaper (which names I'm not going to mention but you can see them in the study on page 16) and found out that in one newspaper 67.3 % of articles are used without source, and in other 3 the articles with only one source were found in 69.5 % , 81,3 % and 49.8 % respectively... " So in my opinion when we are using EX Yu newspapers as a source we should be extremely careful with informations ,support them with independent neutral foreign newspapers,interviews from Novak himself and from his family and possibly from biographies which are recognised as RS.

In this case regarding this information we have to few RS (only one in which his father speaks that he comes from "Serb tribes" and he does not mention his mother although it is common sense that Novak is half Serb-half Croat) and that is why I think that we should leave it like editor Fyunck(click) proposed without mentioning his ethnicity . -Theonewithreason (talk) 14:34, 06 August 2020 (UTC)

Father of Novak Djoković is not mentioned in this RfC because these sources also mention him as a Montenegrin and in Novak Djoković article he is Serbian, so this is a question for another RfC. Mikola22 (talk) 15:16, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
Well here you go then ,that means that those sources are unreliable ones, since his father is ethnic Kosovo Serb (as he mentioned that numerous times in recorded interviews and in the show which is recognised on RSN as RS) and croatian newspapers are ignoring that source, and also I don't think that anyone will support you in making 2 or 3 different RFCs on same subject regarding one information about his parents.What you are doing is implying -Theonewithreason (talk) 15:26, 06 August 2020 (UTC)
We have two RS which talk about Novak's father and as Montenegrin, it's a word of Novak Djoković and Zdenko Žagar(family). Why these sources would be "unreliable ones"? These sources are confirmed as reliable sources on RSN. Since the question of the father's origin is more complicated, this question is not for this RfC. As for 2 or 3 of mine RfC, I don't know what you're talking about?Mikola22 (talk) 15:40, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
Actually no they were not recognised on RSN as RS since on the first one you were the one who made a conclusion that it is a RS and editor WeBDuB disagreed ,there were no conclusion from slatersteven or the other editors with whom you made most of the discussion, on the other hand he did confirmed that the source from HAPPY TV is a RS when he wrote "primary but RS" and you didn't mentioned this source on this RFC ,also father's origin is not complicated everyone who knows something about history of that region and the current situation knows exactly what is Srdjan by ethnicity and why is he so vocal about that and what is his opinion about situation over there. There are lots of sources on that subject too and are quite easy to find, we could argue that it is more complicated his mothers side since we know almost nothing about her side of the family ,especially not 3 or 4 generations like it is described on his father's side and also knowing the fact that his grandma from mothers side is never mentioned (We know only that her name was Sanda without lastname) but again I try to be reasonable and to go with his "father Serb mother Croat" definition since the sources are implying that and again Srdjan definetly knows what he is.-Theonewithreason (talk) 16:00, 06 August 2020 (UTC)
Actually no they were not recognised on RSN as RS since on the first one you were the one who made a conclusion that it is a RS and editor WeBDuB disagreed Editor Slatersteven confirmed that it was RS, that is, he did not say anything against that source ie reliability. We have and old case from 2010 and one of two sources is Slobodna Dalmacija source. (Comment: The sources seem reliable but there are issues with the presentation of the materials because knowing the nationality of parents does not equate to claims of "ancestry". I'll take those up on the article talk page.)[4] Mikola22 (talk) 16:44, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
Again I disagree that was not a comment from editor Slatersteven and yes he also did not specifically said that it is RS it was your conclusion, on the other hand what you have now presented is an old Comment like you said from 2010. back when we had less information about Novak. In current time it is more clear that this statement is not true since we have more statements from Novak father and in the same comment it is written that it does not equals the claims of ancestry which shows that even back then there were questions about clarity of the written sentence.-Theonewithreason (talk) 16:57, 06 August 2020 (UTC)

Antivaccination Views

Multiple news outlets today publishing reports of Novak expressing anti-vax views. Someone should add to the wiki article under "Off The Court" section.[5]— Preceding unsigned comment added by Johntflan (talk • contribs) 11:55, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

@Johntflan: I read carefully the article you linked. It doesn't say that Djokovic is anti-vax, it just says that he is against compulsory vaccination against Covid-19 in tennis. Since there is still no anti-covid19 vaccine, I think it is not notable enough to be mentioned in the article. Why would we have to mention him being against vaccination with a vaccine that doesn't exist? Vanjagenije (talk) 13:10, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks so much for the rapid and detailed assessment. Perhaps this article from BusinessInsider is more clear.

Novak Djokovic says he wouldn't want to be inoculated against the coronavirus because he is "opposed to vaccination." He is not specifically against a theoretical covid vaccine but against one in principle because of "personal views".

Thanks again for your great work

This article is only semiprotected and so does not require admin permissions to edit. Please only use the {{admin-help}} template if you require the completion of a specific task that can only be performed by an administrator. Yunshui 雲水 13:56, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
Looks like the guy has gone off the deep end, now making false claims about emotions affecting water molecules[6], I think this and the anti-vax stuff belong in the article. Of 19 (talk) 17:58, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

I'm surprised the above information isn't in his article. The pseudoscience information is pretty big news...[7]Dragpent (talk) 21:13, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Update to Section: Heading

Adding Djokovic as one of the greatest players is fine as long as Nadal and Federer are mentioned. Its pretty hard to contest the top 3 slam count among the 3, especially when all 3 have time to earn more slams. Seems like it is only fair to label it this way. If it makes you feel any better i will add it to federer's and nadal's pages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andrewmoody71 (talk • contribs) 05:58, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

It's pretty subjective stuff, especially in the lead. This is a Djokovic page, not a Federer or nadal page. And greatest is not judged by slam count alone... there is so much more depending on who you ask and historical dominance. No one was number one longer than Pancho Gonzales. No one won more majors than Ken Rosewall. No one dominated their peers like Bill Tilden. The surface are so alike now than all-court players dominate like never before. The grass and clay and balls and rackets are so different today than in the past that they are hardly recognizable. There is no chance that the three greatest players in 140 years of tennis are all playing at the same time. Things have changed to allow these players to exist. Fyunck(click) (talk) 07:48, 13 April 2020 (UTC)


@Fyunck

The matter isn't to make a definitive judgement as to who is the greatest of all time, what we should be doing is highlighting the fact that countless current players, former players, pundits and fans all recognise Federer, Djokovic and Nadal to be among the greatest, if not the greatest players of all time. This could be backed up by possibly thousands of citations. Someone who knows nothing about tennis would have to scroll half way down these pages before finding out that these players are considered to be among the best ever by those most involved with the sport, which is just ludicrous. If you look at the wikipedia pages for other notable sportsmen of the current era (Messi, Ronaldo, Michael Jordan, Sachin Tendulkar) they all have in the heading that these sportsmen are considered among the best in their sport and they are absolutely right to do so. Jokemuncher (talk) 13:19, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

RFC before adding content about meditation

Is this [8] viable for entry into personal life? TL;DR Đoković has meditated with Semir Osmanagić on the alleged Bosnian pyramid (theory and a hoax no doubt). Could be included as one sentence in the section Early and personal life, in the last part where it says: Djokovic has been reported to meditate for up to an hour a day at the Buddhist Buddhapadipa Temple in Wimbledon, and is close to monks in the complex. He has spoken of the positive power of meditation? Mhare (talk) 13:04, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

I think it's valuable information from his personal life and fits next to existing information from the article. Mikola22 (talk) 16:15, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
Trivial information about whether players meditate before a match. Djokovic is a spiritual person and it's mentioned that he has the highest decoration of the Serbian Orthodox Church. They meditate. Fyunck(click) (talk) 18:39, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

Novak's mother

I know we already had the RfC about Novak's mother four years ago, but there is also WP:CCC policy. Djokovic is a world-famous star who is in the media almost every day, there would certainly be a huge number of reliable sources in many languages ​​for any important information about him. Am I wrong? Is that consistent with WP:UNDUE? When sources said that his mother is “Croatian origin”, it can refer to Croatia as a country, not to Croat ethnicity. Even in the Croatian language, the term Hrvati / Hrvatice (Croatians) is often used for the inhabitants of Croatia. We cannot know whether she may be from a Serb, Yugoslav, Slovene (Žagar is very common surname among them) or Jewish family in Croatia or from a so-called mixed marriage. Only a few Croatian sources speak in the context of ethnicity and use the same sentence over the years (they even seem to use sh. and hr. Wikipedia as a source), without explaining how they came to this information. The only original Serbian source who claim the same is the irreverent and sensationalist tabloid Kurir from 2006 (WP:AGE MATTERS), which is definitely not RS. According to WP:BLP: Be very firm about the use of high-quality sources. All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be supported by an inline citation to a reliable, published source. I think it's ok the sentence about "maternal Croatian descent" remains, but with link to Croatia, not Croats. --WEBDuB (talk) 14:40, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

I agree with the proposition. We have very little (if any) RS on the subject matter. Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 00:06, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
From source: "Istina je da je moja supruga Hrvatica, ali je isto tako istina da ona u Srbiji živi više od 40 godina i da je lojalan građanin naše države." "It is true that my wife is Croatian, but it is also true that she has lived in Serbia for more than 40 years and that she is a loyal citizen of our country." If some sportsman has right to play for another country then it is because of citizenship or origin. In this source Croatian citizenship is not mentioned, only is mentioned "Croatian". From source: "Neki zli ljudi pokušavaju da iskoriste njeno poreklo kako bi naneli štetu Đokovićima", "Some evil people are trying to use its origins to harm the Djokovics". Therefore, the source speak about origin and we must respect RS. If in the future appear some new informations from RS about origin of Novak Djokovic's mother we will take this into account and discuss it. Until then, we must respect current sources. Based on the above, I do not agree with this proposal. Mikola22 (talk) 06:42, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Even Serbian newspapers wrote http://www.mc.rs/novak-nije-hrvat.6.html?eventId=28445 that the mother was Croatian and that Djokovic's father said, but the propagandist Sadko and WEBDuB (Redacted) so that he could more easily write about Serbian propaganda and lie do not give up changes. So if you are so "neutral" write that his father is also Montenegrin, because there are many sources about it. Translation from source : It is true that my wife is Croatian, but it is also true that she has lived in Serbia for more than 40 years and that she is a loyal citizen of our country. Her parents are former military personnel, born in Vinkovci, who found their life and happiness in Belgrade. Some evil people are trying to use its origins to harm the Djokovics, just for the sake of their petty interests. We never thought about going and moving to Croatia. That is the only and true truth. Do you think that emphasizing the story that Novak's mother is Croatian could harm you and your son? - Serbs are normal people and my wife has never had a problem with other nations. I repeat, Serbia is our country, we love and respect it. I sincerely believe that no one will blame Novak for his mother being Croatian. It's not that woman's fault that she comes from a partisan family! Can all this story about your son's Croatian origin make you leave Serbia? No. The Djokovics never hid the fact that they had only one homeland - Serbia. We sincerely believe that the state will help us to create a tennis camp in our country, for which we will be known in the world. The entire domestic public expects Novak to be the world's number one, and we will do our best to present the Serbian tricolor in the best way in the world - concluded Srdjan Djokovic. Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.136.87.219 (talk) 07:48, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Srdjan Djokovic is a Serb from Kosovo, that is the real truth, his father was never a Montenegrin (all RS are confirming that he is of Serbian descent and only of serbian descent) since that area of his ancestors is the area of old Herzegovina incorporated not before 1878. in what is today Montenegro, but most of the people who live there are Serbs even today - https://www.in4s.net/srdjan-djokovic-stao-uz-novaka-sine-ti-si-ponos-srpskog-naroda/ , it is also obvious that when we are speaking of neutrality you do not have good intensions since you are pushing your own "truth" and only one source, it is very hard to determine Dijanas ethnicity since we dont know the whole family background — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.9.202.230 (talk) 14:42, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
So put the source where she said or her husband that she is not Croatian so that source will not be valid. This was an interview with her husband who said she was Croatian. Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.136.87.219 (talk) 15:01, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
Please, sign your comments. There is no Serbian source that states cited claim. The mentioned website (mc.rs), which was used as an argument in the RfC, is a press clipping service that published the text from the irreverent and sensationalist tabloid Kurir. I don't think it would be difficult to dispute the validity of that source. Even if they are reliable and neutral sources, is it relevant enough to be included in an article for a person who appears in the media every day around the world? (WP:ONUS, WP:UNDUE) Even if the cited Croatian portals are reliable sources, it doesn't mean that they are neutral on this topic. (WP:NPOVS) Most importantly, they are low-quality sources and we don't have an insight for most of how they got this information about the family, which are all important according to the WP:BLP. Certainly, I am not proposing to remove the information, but to change the link, since no source speaks precisely about ethnicity.--WEBDuB (talk) 18:02, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
In the book Novak Djokovic - The Biography: The Biography by Chris Bowers, Bowers states Djokovic’s mother as being of “Croatian parentage”. OyMosby (talk) 21:17, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
The “Croatian parentage” is not disputable. Speaking of which, we have also here category “Serbian people of Croatian descent”, but it doesn't refer to ethnicity (like categories “Croats of Serbia”, “Croats of Vojvodina”...), but to origin from a specific country. If the author had said “Croat parentage”, we could say that we are 100% sure. For example, the Siniša Mihajlović article correctly states that he has a Croat mother because there are sources that confirm that. [9][10] I'm not saying that's not true, but we don't have reliable sources that state that. There is a high probability that Dijana is from the family of Yugoslavs, considering that her parents worked in the Yugoslav People's Army, but that is all speculation. Verifiability is one of Wikipedia core content policies, with special rules for living persons.--WEBDuB (talk) 21:53, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
You had mentioned that there were weak sources for backing the Croatian denotation and wished for better sources. So I brought up the book as it’s better than using a news site. As for concrete ethnicity, there strangely doesn’t seem to be anything about the mother being Croat or Serb or etc. All I saw was the father allude to her ethnicity in a way saying they're a Partisan family and that somehow mentioning Croatian lineage is seen as hurting the family in his eyes. Sorry he feels that way. All in all I guess It’s unknown what the mother is ethnicity wise. OyMosby (talk) 22:09, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
That's what I try to say all the time. You have found a good source, but it still does not solve our problem. What do you think about the link proposal? Novak personally says that his mother, or more precisely her parents, is “from Croatia”. [11] Unfortunately, Novak's father had numerous nationalist and controversial statements. I really think we would only be reliable if we had a personal statement from Dijana. For example, we have a plenty of sources about the Afrikaners descent of Roger Federer's mother.--WEBDuB (talk) 22:47, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
It’s so strange that other player’s backgrounds are pretty thorough and transparent but Djokovic’s is sorta vague. I think it makes sense to link to Croatia as nationality not Croat ethnicity. He should be removed from Croats of Serbia page for the time being as well. OyMosby (talk) 23:31, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
  • Mother of Novak Djoković is Croatian and new source say that [12] "kada joj je Srđanova majka rekla da sam Hrvatica".. "when Srdjan's mother told her that I was a Croat". Considering that Novak Djokovic's mother was born in Belgrade and lived in Serbia, the mention of being a Croat means that she is of Croatian origin. Source does not say that she is from Belgrade, from Serbia or from Croatia. She is Croatian ie Croat. Mikola22 (talk) 10:54, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
She didn't declare herself a Croat, but said that her husband's mother said that she was a Croat. Something like that can't be a relevant source ("She said that he said that she said..."), especially in the biography articles of living people. Also, the term Hrvati / Hrvatice (Croatians) is often used in Serbian and Croatian languages for the citizens of Croatia, not only for Croats as ethnic groups.--WEBDuB (talk) 22:04, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The term Hrvati / Hrvatice (Croatians) is often used in Serbian and Croatian languages also for the Croats as ethnic groups. If someone was born in Belgrade and lived in Serbia for 20 years and after 20 years it is mentioned that this person is a Croat(when someone gets married) then this means that she is of Croatian origin. Interview of Diana Djoković, Youtube source "at that time we did not hide what we are and who we are" "no one at the time cared who are and what the parents are" (min 8:54-8:59), "where is the bride from?(someone from the relatives asks),she is Croat"(words of Dijana Djoković), (min 9:22-9:23). Dijana Djoković does not say that she is from Croatia, she say just a "Croat". In this context is said earlier that at that time no one looked at who was who, (this is usually said in the context of mixed marriages). Here is mention of Croat as an ethnic group. Why would someone who lived in Serbia for 20 years and who was born in Belgrade say that at that time "no one cared who are and what the parents are". Source, Youtube [13] By the way, you know that in the Serbian media, his Croatian ethnic origin is mentioned in public comments, and in a negative context. I guess Novak Djokovic's mother would have denied it somewhere in 10 years that those comments bother her, or Novak's father or Novak Djokovic himself would denied it somewhere. Novak Djokovic for the Croatian media told that his mother was Croatian from Vinkovci [14], but she was born in Belgrade, she was not born in Vinkovci and Croatia. Mikola22 (talk) 06:07, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
I am going to reffer on your last source you posted (Slobodna Dalmacija) this source is definetly not valid since Djokovic never mentioned that particular quote anywhere else (and definetly not on live stream like you posted with Dijana with youtube tv show), Slobodna Dalmacija are not RS since their known history of spreading missinformation and ethnical tension (one of the best known is when they accused Serbs that they masked themselves as croatian fans and caused riots in the game between Czech Republic and Croatia at EURO causing a huge negative backlash from all regional newspapers) and also this qoute is matter of constant agressive attacks towards Novak from particulary croatian commentators on daily newspaper bickering base between 2 sides ,some of them going so far that they are saying that Novak is not a Serbian tennis player (I can prove that but I dont have intentions to vary from the subject) and since we have numerous sources (especially from Srdjan Djokovic himself in the last 10 years) where he clearly speaks about his origin ,ethnicity and even his over nationalistic feelings about his Serb tribes and Serbs ,considering that he is 2 generations native and ethnic Serb from Zvecan, Kosovo I think it is even apsurd to mention it. On the other hand in some point Webdub is right because this youtube stream also confirmed that Dijana said : "her husband's mother said that she was a Croat,but her sister heard it wrong and said she was a singer" -that is just one detail but yet again in my opinion the article states that "Novak is of paternal Serbian and maternal Croatian descent" and I dont think that anybody has a intention to change that (Webdub also mentioned that in his first comment) but it is noticable that we have almost 300 years of lineage on Novak on his father side but only vague mention that Dijanas parents are from Vinkovci and nothing else (example where is Zdenko Zagar born,what is his ethnicity, why is Dijana ortodox christian by religion etc. we know very little about her) - so with the information we have at hand, the article is very well written — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.9.202.230 (talk) 07:57, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Slobodna Dalmacija is Croatian daily newspaper from 1943 and it is not RS? What is RS then? Novak Djokovic was not interviewed by Slobodna Dalmacija but a journalist who then worked for Slobodna Dalmacija, Davor Burazin. The editorial board of this newspaper probably has its own editorial office and does not publish fake news. Who then heard for Novak Djokovic in Croatia, no one. Youtube source is from TV show and from this TV show is new information in Serbian internet portal B92 which is used here as a source. Husband of Dijana Djoković in RS said that she is Croatian and that "Neki zli ljudi pokušavaju da iskoriste njeno poreklo kako bi naneli štetu Đokovićima" "Some evil people are trying to use her's origins to harm the Djokovics." Well, I guess it is clear that it is Croatian origin in question. An example from a similar article of Dražen Petrović, first source: "His father was a Serb and his mother a Croat, second source: Dejan Bodiroga private claim "Moja baba, očeva majka je od Petrovića. Draženov djed i moja baka su rođeni brat i sestra, tako da smo mi vrlo blizak rod" "My grandmother, my father's mother, is from Petrovic. Drazen’s grandfather and my grandmother are a born brother and sister, so we are a very close family", third source: "Petrovic, whose father is a Serb". Nowhere in the sources which exist in the article about Drazen Petrovic say that his father is ethnic Serb and article contains this information, I have never heard Drazen Petrovic's mother or brother talk about his father as an ethnic Serb. Therefore, if Novak Djokovic is not a Croat by mother, then Drazen Petrovic cannot be a Serb by father because the sources use the same fact Serb-Croat. If this is rule then both articles must be equated. Mikola22 (talk) 10:13, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Kurir is also a daily newspaper in Serbia and it doesnt make it a reliable source, Slobodna Dalmacija are definetly NOT a reliable source since I already showed you an example of their controversy and that is not just one and the fact that this kind of quote never reapered and again Novak never repeated that in any other newspaper ,especially foreign ones or in a recorded interview puts that qoute in question,also the fact that you need to go back in 2006. to reffer that as a source and to ignore all other sources show actual lack of information, especially the recorded sources made by Srdjan Djokovic (one of them is put as a reference in main article), also Novak Djokovic was well known athlete in whole Region in 2006. since he was rapidly climbing on ATP list at that time ,so that claim is not true. My suggestion to you is to read my post first. Regarding your claim that both articles need to be equated because you think that there are only sources about Petrovic that you posted, that is also not true, it is also known that Jovan Petrovic came from Trebinje to Sibenik to work for police and that his "SLAVA" is Arhandjeo Mihael (interesting the same one has Novak Djokovic himself) so there are more information about him then you think there is, feel free to check. AS for their nationalistic affiliation ,it is a known fact that Novak is a Serbian nationalist or patriot (instagram quotes on Vidovdan, his strong connection with Kosovo...) and Drazen was a Croatian patriot or nationalist which was shown in ESPN show "30 for 30" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.9.202.230 (talk) 11:08, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Mikola22, you are again discussing the same quote via statements with excessive length. (WP:BLUDGEON) I have to remind you that you have already been warned about that after the AE report.--WEBDuB (talk) 16:59, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Bowers on P13 says "from his ethnic heritage you could argue he was half-Montenegrin and half-Croat" [15], Total Croatia News says "his mother, Dijana, is a Croat from Vinkovci" [16], but 99% of readers won't know the difference and will think this is all the same, whichever wording is chosen. Tezwoo (talk) 22:38, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Bowers made a lots of different opinions in his book actually if you read the source you posted you can see that he wrote:"In exploring Djokovic ethnic heritage,its important not to dilute the fact that he is a Serb" after that :"That his paternal ancestors are ethnic Serbs from Montenergro and that almost a half of population of Montenegro are Serbs" and also "that he is a third generation Serb born in Serbia" that is a direct link of your source page 12 CHAPTER ONE with the title: An ethnic mix followed by already known part of his paternal lineage, but that is all already written in the article ,neverthless tha best source is Srdjan himself when were talking about him :https://www.in4s.net/srdjan-djokovic-stao-uz-novaka-sine-ti-si-ponos-srpskog-naroda/ , https://happytv.rs/televizija/ćirilica/108450/pogledajte-ćirilicu-o-kojoj-će-se-dugo-pričati-srđan-đoković-i-novakov-teniski-otac-nikola-pilić-otvoreno-o-najboljem-teniseru-sveta-video, https://tenisuzivo.com/srdan-dokovic-novak-u-britaniji-mi-smo-srbi-i-uvek-cemo-biti/ 178.9.202.230 (talk) 05:08, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
Tezwoo, that's a good source. Furthermore, the author also explains that Novak's father is a Kosovo Serb and Montenegrin Serb.--WEBDuB (talk) 14:42, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

@WEBDuB: Revert my edit because it is consistent with the sources. We have RS and fact that his mother is an ethnic Croat and I ask that this be respected, otherwise I will return the edit myself. What does debate on talk page has with my edit and information from the source? The debate was about existing sources and not about new RS. Stop vandalizing the article. And for the origin of father Novak Djokovic, you begin another discussion and after that we will edit the article. Mikola22 (talk) 15:08, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

As I said, no one will notice that anything is different with these recent changes, which basically come down to which article is linked/piped to the word "Croatian". Tezwoo (talk) 22:10, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

@WEBDuB: Did you reached an agreement to change ethnicity in the main article or is Mikola22 doing it on his own (what he thinks is right) ? As far I can see nobody agreed to put the reference since the Source describes it differently ,as for you Mikola 22 please read the source you are referring to ,since "half Montenegrin-half Croat" is incomplete and only one quotation of the source . --Theonewithreason (talk) 15:42, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

There is no consensus yet. Please do not change this part before establishing an agreement. For instance, Novak's maternal grandfather said in recently added source “I always said that I was a Yugoslav or a Croat”. Furthermore, there is different and sometimes contradictory information about Novak's father (Serbian, Kosovo Serb, Montenegrin, Montenegrin Serb...).--WEBDuB (talk) 15:13, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
Serbian Wikipedia: "Na srpskohrvatskom govornom području i na srednjoevropskim jezicima se pod "nacijom" obično podrazumijeva etnička zajednica, pa nacionalnost u pravilu predstavlja sinonim za nečiji etnički identitet...In the Serbo-Croatian-speaking area and in Central European languages, "nation" usually means an ethnic community, so nationality is usually synonymous with one's ethnic identity."[17] Novak's maternal grandfather said: "Ja sam po nacionalnosti Hrvat i rođen sam u Vinkovcima...I am a Croat by nationality and I was born in Vinkovci." And his grandson has Croatian blood, everything is clean. Mikola22 (talk) 16:21, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
Nobody denied it, we came to better sources after the start of the debate. You've already explained that. Please, stop with the WP:BLUDGEON. There is a specific situation where we have different information in the same sources. I suggest that the current sentence remain: He is of paternal Serbian and maternal Croatian descent, and then in the footnote add information about paternal Kosovo Serb, Montenegrin, and Montenegrin Serb origin, as well as maternal Croat and Yugoslav heritage.--WEBDuB (talk) 17:06, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
(Please, stop with the WP:BLUDGEON), I'm talking about a new source that no one has seen yet and you mention the nationality of his grandfather. Then I guess we have to clarify that and this explanation has nothing to do with WP:BLUDGEON. As far as the proposals are concerned, we must respect better quality sources, and these are the last added. I support edit and information based on RS which editor Theonewithreason enter to the article. Information on quality RS is a better candidate to stay in the article. In any case, both information can remain in the article. As for the Yugoslav heritage, grandfather says that he is of Croatian nationality and not of Yugoslav nationality, you can add it(Yugoslav) to my source but with information about Croatian nationality and that he was never a Serb. Mikola22 (talk) 17:37, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Mikola, with your version, we essentially have two sentences in the opening section that convey the same message. "Novak's ethnic heritage is half-Kosovo Serb and half-Croat" and the next sentence says "He is of paternal Serbian and maternal Croatian descent." What is the point of repeating the same information twice? The second sentence is the stable version, establishes which side is which and includes an explanatory footnote. --Griboski (talk) 17:37, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

The second sentence is with the weaker reliable sources, the new reliable sources are much more concrete and of better quality and this is what we need for the article. As far as the stable version is concerned, I don't know what that should mean, in a past month better sources came and we are improving the article towards better. Otherwise it is not a repeating, "Novak's ethnic heritage" is mentioned in the first sentence and in the second sentence it is not mentioned. Mikola22 (talk) 17:49, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
Descent refers to one's ancestry, heritage, origin, etc. Having both sentences is therefore redundant. I think that the Bowers reference is a good English source that explores the intricacies of Novak's origins in a balanced manner. I agree with WEBDuB, perhaps it could be included in the footnote. --Griboski (talk) 18:06, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
We must respect quality RS, if the source mentions and Croatian ethnic heritage I guess this is very important information from RS. I don't know why this information from RS should be hidden. This is the main rule of Wikipedia, respecting information from quality RS. Mikola22 (talk) 18:20, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
Basically I do agree with all of you since the word descent in english dictionary means origin ,ethnicity, ancestry... so it is repeating itself, that's why I asked did you reached an agreement about puting the other sentence in article. If I can suggest anything we can leave it as it is and add a birthplace of both parents (like Mikola22 posted) plus the source (biography book) or we can change the sentence into "by ethnic origin half Serb on paternal side and half Croat on maternal side" I put the Kosovo Serb in just because the book describes it like that (third generation Serb from Kosovo) but you don't have to go in such details. And since his father refers himself as ethnic Serb from the other sources and his mother refers herself as ethnic Croat one of this statements will suffice.--Theonewithreason (talk) 19:17, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
We cannot base some fact on weaker sources. As far as Croatian part of ancestry is concerned, in article exist two sources, the first source does not mention Croatia at all and second source is from Kurir.rs ie tabloid and it is not a quality RS. The only thing left for us is this quality RS and information about his half Croatian ethnic heritage + additional source(2020) from his grandfather, who is of Croatian nationality ie origin, and his claim that Novak has Croatian blood, this is information from Serbian TV channel Nova.rs. For this reason the first source is for now the only one we can present in the article. That is why I support your earlier edit because it is the only correct and possible if we respect quality RS. " while Novak Djokovic's ethnic heritage is half-Kosovo Serb and half-Croat" This is the only possible option for now if we respect information from RS, paternal and maternal are not mentioned. Mikola22 (talk) 19:48, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
I agree with you and other editors too, I kinda have a feeling we are talking about same thing here. Can you just explain is there a problem with the sentence "father of Serbian descent and mother of Croatian descent" that we have now in article. Do you think it does not clarify things enough ?--Theonewithreason (talk) 20:07, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
I have not researched sources which mention the origin of Novak's father in details but this last source speaks very concretely about his origin, so from that point of view it is the best choice because is high quality source. For "mother of Croatian descent" we do not have RS. We have RS that Novak Djokovic's ethnic heritage is half-Croat. Mikola22 (talk) 20:27, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
You're missing the point. "He is of.. maternal Croatian descent" already implies that he's of Croatian ethnic origin through his mom's side. Having two sentences with the same information is unnecessary. I'm not saying the sources you've given aren't quality sources. Include them. Unlike some, I'm not disputing his Croat heritage. I'm just for keeping the current structure. I'm also fine with a sort of merger like Theonewithreason suggested, if you're worried that it's not clear enough it's about ethnicity. --Griboski (talk) 23:15, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
"already implies that he's of Croatian ethnic origin through his mom's side." The source (Kurir.rs ie tabloid, already questioned as a source) information does not speak about that, the source says that Dijana Žagar is Croatian and that may mean and that she is not Croatian ethnic origin and we cannot interpret the sources on our own. Editor WEBDuB exactly this claims ie that this is not information for ethnic origin ie that descent is not ethnic origin, and he put a link to the state of Croatia not to Croats as an ethnic group. In any case, we must use the RS which specifically talks about the origin of Novak Djokovic. Otherwise I have nothing to worry about, I am an editor and I must use RS and information from RS ie "while Novak Djokovic's ethnic heritage is and half-Croat"' in addition, I added and new source(2020) on his grandfather's nationality ie origin. Mikola22 (talk) 06:06, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
Since we didn't achieved any agreement Mikola22 I expect that you put full citations next time you decide to edit something in the article. You should respect that most of us gave you support and not missusing it. --Theonewithreason (talk) 18:30, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
In the source exist "Montenegrin ethnic heritage" and "Serbian ethnicity", and I as an editor can’t put this information because I don't know which information is according to RS. However, we left sources which speak about mother of Novak Djoković but first source does not speak about origin at all and second source is from tabloid (already questioned as an unreliable source) so I suggest removing these two sources from the article and replace them with this quality RS. Mikola22 (talk) 19:52, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
As an editor you should also respect that source clearly explains that his father is a Serb from Kosovo in details, 2 generations from there and then explains the part that his older generations are ethnic Serbs from what is today Montenegro, so you should have include the ethnic Serb part also, the first source you are referring to is RS since it is the TV show in which Srdjan Djokovic himself explains the exact thing I explained right now so this source should stay. And again we still have a problem of doubling the same information. So I am offering you a compromise, my suggestion is to merge 2 sentence into one and since you got personal issue with the word descent, instead of descent we put "paternal Serbian and maternal Croatian ethnic heritage".-Theonewithreason (talk) 20:07, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
@Theonewithreason: I agree with compromise "paternal Serbian and maternal Croatian ethnic heritage" and put new RS for this information because that’s all we have at the moment. Mikola22 (talk) 20:20, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
Very well , I will do that now but I can't be sure that someone is not going to change it. If we manage to establish consensus with some other users like Griborski then we can have a stabile article for a longer period of time.-Theonewithreason (talk) 20:07, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
There is no consensus yet. Novak's maternal grandfather said “I always said that I was a Yugoslav or a Croat”. We need to choose the most concise and comprehensive sentence, which should also include Kosovo Serb and possible Montenegrin and Yugoslav origin.--WEBDuB (talk) 20:46, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
The agreement is reached between most editors and since descent also means ethnic heritage, origin etc. puting the "ethnic heritage" will save us from constant edit warring and further discussion regarding this subject, please be reasonable, most of the sources are implying that Novak is ethnic Serb on father side and ethnic Croat on his mother side. And also this discussion last already too long -Theonewithreason (talk) 20:53, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
Grandfather said that he is of Croat nationality and everything is clear. Serbian Wikipedia (nacionalnost u pravilu predstavlja sinonim za nečiji etnički identitet.."nationality generally presents synonymous for someone's ethnic identity"). I support editor Theonewithreason and information from new RS. Mikola22 (talk) 20:56, 23 July 2020 (UTC)


@Theonewithreason: of father Serbian descent and mother Croatian descent" should stay or change into heritage. We can't put that in the article, I knew it right away(a month ago), it has to be written in RS. I thought that (Novak Djokovic - The Biography) was the best source, but unfortunately it is not. Serbian mean nationality ie ethnic background. (they are both citizen of Serbia born there) Nationality mean ethnic origin ie background not cit :izenship. It is explained on Reliable sources/Noticeboard. We will try to find a quality source ie RS for the mother and that’s it. If we do not find source, information about the mother will not be in the article. Mikola22 (talk) 13:38, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Mikola22 I am aware why you constructed the sentence like this since I read your discussion on RSN with editors there today so I'm not going to change anything you wrote. I only added "of" since I think it's grammaticaly correct. Basically i support your work since you trying to be objective and work by wikipedia rules, allthough in the end I think we both know how it's going to end. Like editor Griborski also noted , by most sources it is obvious that his mother is a Croat and father a Serb. We just need agreement between editors and like you said more RS but In my opinion the future sources are going to be similar like previous ones. Theonewithreason (talk) 13:54, 26 July 2020 (UTC)-
You saw that I respect that RS, not because I would like that ethnic exist in the article but because RS mentioned ethnic. In any case, the ethnic will no longer be in article (because we do not have sources which mention it) but there will be mentioned a Croat nationality of mother, and this is and ethnic origin. Normally we need to see which source is the best source and whether it can pass RSN. Mikola22 (talk) 14:30, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
Nationality 1. the status of belonging to a particular nation. 2. an ethnic group forming a part of one or more political nations... so much trouble to change one word of almost equal meaning "descent" - "nationality" just because the RS must specifically describe one or another word. I am aware of wikipedia rules and that everything needs to be sourced ,but sometimes it's really exausting. This is just my personal observation and respect to all wikipedians -Theonewithreason (talk) 15:04, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
We look at nationality from a Balkan perspective because the sources are from the Balkans. Nationality in the Balkans mostly means ethnic origin. In Croatia, nationality means narodnost(ethnic origin), in Bosnia and Herzegovina nationality means ethnic origin. When I personally mention nationality I mean ethnic origin. Otherwise I agree for "descent" case but you heard the explanation. We cannot put something in an article if this is not stated in the source. Mikola22 (talk) 15:19, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
Actually, we look at nationality from an English language perspective, as this is an English language Wikipedia. Look at Websters or OED for your definitions and use the terms nationality or ethnicity as needed. Fyunck(click) (talk) 18:18, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
@Fyunck(click): From RSN "No, to claim "Serbian decent" it must say that. If he says he is Serbian is he referring to his ethnic background his nationality".
I cant use ethnicity because RS don't say that but I can use only nationality. Nationality probably in English term means and citizen but I have to respect RS.Mikola22 (talk) 18:40, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
We can use the word nationality as per Source since it has the same meaning in english language perspective as in Balkan countries. Here is the definiton from Webster dictionary (Merriam-Webster) [[18]] and a partial citation : " a people having a common origin, tradition, and language and capable of forming or actually constituting a nation-state" and another one : "an ethnic group constituting one element of a larger unit (such as a nation)". -Theonewithreason (talk) 19:26, 26 July 2020 (UTC)-
@Theonewithreason: I edit article according to the sources, as an example I used the article of Dražen Petrović. Now we should find information and sources for the father and then check this sources on RSN. If you think that current source is good for "ethic" fact, you put this information in the article(father). Mikola22 (talk) 12:41, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
Please, do not change until consensus is established. There is my proposal (Bowers and Novak's grandfather): Novak Djokovic (Nole) was born on 22 May 1987 in Belgrade, SR Serbia, Yugoslavia. Novak's father Srđan was born in a village near Trepča in Kosovo in a Serb family that originates in Montenegro as well. In the early 1980s, he moved to Belgrade. Novak's mother Dijana (née Žagar) was born in Belgrade to parents who moved from Vinkovci in Croatia and declared themselves Croats or Yugoslavs.--WEBDuB (talk) 13:46, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
Bowers is not RS(explained on RSN), for now two sources are reliable, Novak's grandfather source and Novak Djokovic source from Slobodna Dalmacija. This is confirmed on RSN, source for father (from Happy TV) is primary but RS. That's what we have for now if we respect rules of Wikipedia, you try to confirm some another source for father or mother. ("and declared themselves Croats or Yugoslavs") this is information in the Yugoslav context when a lot of people(including my parents and me) declared themselves as Yugoslavs, he clearly says that he is of Croatian nationality ie origin. However we cannot use that source as the main one because then it has to write according to Djoković grandfather(explained on RSN), the main RS is from Slobodna Dalmacija which is RS, and "grandfather" source is an additional source for the origin of his mother(as confirmation, so that there would be no doubt). Mikola22 (talk) 15:05, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
@Fyunck(click), WEBDuB, Mikola22, and Griboski: ,I apologise for pinging you all ,but since this discussion is going in circles ,why don't we ask one experienced administrator who will help us to construct a correct sentence based on sources we have and the explanations from Webster english dictionary, most of you are long time here so you know at least one with experience and knowledge for this particular problem. Theonewithreason (talk) 20:10, 27 July 2020 (UTC)-
@Theonewithreason: I suggested to editor WEBDuB that we start RfC based on these two sources(RS), I state my sentence, he say his sentence, we can have and third option so you can say your sentence. And let the editors decide. Mikola22 (talk) 20:31, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Most administrators aren't going to get involved with a person's heritage. Wikipedia player bios should be about the player. Sure you mention the parents of high profile players. Rarely you might even mention where the parents are from. You aren't going to go into the grandparents or genealogy in the summary of a tennis player, sources or not. If I were to write this I would scrap all the nationality lunacy and make it simple:

"Novak Djokovic was born on 22 May 1987 in Belgrade, SR Serbia, Yugoslavia, to parents Srđan and Dijana (née Žagar). Novak's father Srđan was born in a village near Trepča, in Kosovo, and in the early 1980s, moved his family to Belgrade. Novak's mother Dijana (née Žagar) was born in Belgrade. His two younger brothers, Marko and Djordje, have also played professional tennis."

That's it. There seems to be some sort of battle going on between different nationalities that makes this article unstable, and i don't really like that. So remove the source of controversy and state where his parents were born and where his father moved them. That's it! That's all we need. Make sure the birth places are sourced so readers can find the details if they want it. Fyunck(click) (talk) 21:01, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

That is very reasonable suggestion but unfortunately not stabile one in a long term. Since we will have POV attacks from both sides demanding to put the ethnicty from one or the other side. My suggestion is ( I really like WEBDuB construction so I am going to steal part of it) : "Novak Djokovic (Nole) was born on 22 May 1987 in Belgrade, SR Serbia, Yugoslavia. Novak's father Srđan was born in a village near Trepča in Kosovo in a Serb family. In the early 1980s, he moved to Belgrade. Novak's mother Dijana (née Žagar) was born in Belgrade to Croat parents who moved from Vinkovci, modern day Croatia." I removed the Montenegro part since it goes to far in the past (that is like 3 or 4 generations from Novak) and also Yugoslav part since this country does not exist anymore. Theonewithreason (talk) 21:19, 27 July 2020 (UTC)-
Actually we have had POV attacks from all sides now, because people insist on adding info on his heritage. If we remove it no one will be challenging the claims because the claims won't be there. It will have more of a chance on being stable in the long run. Fyunck(click) (talk) 00:43, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
RS for "Novak's mother Dijana (née Žagar) was born in Belgrade" information is from Slobodna Dalmacija[19] I da mi je majka Hrvatica, iako je rođena u Beogradu "And that my mother is Croat, even though she was born in Belgrade", it is for now the only confirmed RS that we have, I don't know if this information is problem because Croat is mentioned. If this is a problem then we have no other confirmed RS for this information. Otherwise most articles(sportsman etc) contain information about the origin, Pete Sampras etc. This article has two RfC for origin issue so I don’t know is this state fair because those editors from RfC made some decisions. And finally I would like to know can I as an editor open RfC about the origin of the parents, based on two RS? Thanks. Mikola22 (talk) 21:38, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
It appears that besides TV show from Happy Tv the Chris Bowers biography is also now a RS since other editor disputed decision that it is not a RS.Theonewithreason (talk) 21:47, 27 July 2020 (UTC)-
On RSN is said that "Chris Bowers biography" is not RS. [20] This source cannot be part of the article. Mikola22 (talk) 05:43, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
Mikola22, please, stop with that. There is no broad consensus on RSN. Also, you didn't translate the statement well. In the last RfC, the precondition was to find a Serbian source, which was a good idea. However, the only cited source was a press clipping service (mc.rs) that published the text from the tabloid Kurir.--WEBDuB (talk) 22:04, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
You find broad consensus on RSN, that is what we have for now if we follow some procedure. We must respect neutral editors who know whether some source is RS or not. The Kurir is a tabloid, you questioned it yourself and it is not RS. That's why I started RSN procedure to know which sources are RS. Now we know that and we have to use only RS and based on them put information to the article. If there are any problems with some information we have RfC. And then it will be as the editors decide, after that we move on to the next articles, we won’t be here for months. Mikola22 (talk) 05:36, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Didn't her (Dijana Žagar's) father just two weeks ago say in an interview that both he and his ex-wife are ethnic Croats? Doesn't that solve the issue? Quote: "Ja sam Hrvat iz Vinkovaca, kao i moja bivša žena Sanda, Novakova baka." ("I am a Croat from Vinkovci, as is my ex-wife Sanda, Novak's grandmother") [21] Tezwoo (talk) 21:10, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Of course, that is relevant. But he also said that he always declared himself a Yugoslav or a Croat. If we cite one fact from the source, then we must mention other. That should not be neglected. It is estimated that there are about 400,000 ethnic Yugoslavs today. Due to such similar situations, interviews are not the best option for a source in encyclopedias. (WP:INTERVIEW) People can say all sorts of things about themselves, sometimes contradictory things.--WEBDuB (talk) 21:39, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Template talk

I must say I was disappointed with this edit [22]. I mean, it's been over 10 years since I was an active Wikpedia editor, but I remember that, when someone placed a template on an article, that it was incumbent upon them, in most cases, to explain on the talk page why they had done so. I don't see that this has been done here, and I regard that as problematic, because I don't understand the thinking behind the template. Frankly, I think I'd be more than justified in removing the template right now, but I'm a civil fellow, and will first explain myself here.

So what are the claims made by this template?

  • Undue weight
  • Unbalanced section
  • Coatrack

First, and I think most importantly, let's look at the claim that this section violates WP:UNDUE. Well, we have an article that is over 16,000 words long, and I think 152 of those words are in this section. That doesn't sound like a problem to me. But sometimes even a short bit can violate WP:UNDUE, depending on where in the article the bit is placed. Should the anti-vax stuff be placed in the lede section? Someone who was truly trying to place undue weight on this would mention it in the lede. But no, it's buried near the bottom of the article, which at this time certainly seems appropriate to me.

Secondly, the claim that this is an "unbalanced" section. For something to be "unbalanced", there needs to be a distortion between alternative possibilities. But what are the alternatives here? The man has publicly stated that he is against vaccination, and this section merely reports it. It doesn't even say that what he's doing is bad (though most of us might think that). This section is remarkably well-balanced.

Finally, the coatrack claim. I have to wonder if the person who placed that line in the template really understands what the coatrack claim is. My understanding (possibly incorrect) is that if this was a coatrack, then someone reading the entire article, without seeing the title of the article, would think that the article's subject was something else entirely. But this article is clearly about Djokovic.

So now we have this huge and unjustified template that literally at least as large, if not larger, than the section it purports has undue weight. Well here's my thinking: That template is carrying undue weight. I won't remove it now, but I'd like whoever put it there to remove it, or at the very least come here like should have happened before the template was installed and explain/justify the template. Unschool 00:03, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

First of all, material in articles about living people requires a high degree of sensitivity. (WP:BLP) Especially since we know very well how anti-Serbian bias in tennis related media resulted in the case of Monica Seles. Furthermore, the section violates several policies.
There are many statements by tennis players and other public figures who spoke about good intentions during the Adria Tour, as well as adherence to the recommendations and precautionary measures issued by Serbian and Croatian governments (which were probably lifted prematurely, but that isn't Novak's fault). The current tone is extremely unbalanced, more precisely negative and critical, despite numerous sources saying the opposite.
In addition, this is an example of a coatrack section because the title refers to vaccine hesitancy and then the section describes the organization of the tournament. Moreover, there was no anti-vax activism, but only one statement about the condition for starting the ATP tour. We have no information about his overall attitudes and habits regarding the vaccine.--WEBDuB (talk) 15:29, 18 July 2020 (UTC)
I have to respectfully reject pretty much everything you say here. You don't do yourself any favors by tying in the completely irrelevant story of Monica Seles. It has been confirmed beyond dispute that her attack had nothing to do her ethnicity, and this is just a disgusting example of waving the bloody shirt. You would do well to apologize for bringing in such a repugnant ploy.
You speak of the "tone" of the section? It has no tone. It is completely neutral and is simply reporting facts. Please, find me two editors who have never edited this article and with whom you have not previously collaborated on articles, who will attest that this has any kind of negative tone, and I will withdraw my objection to your template. Just two. No, make it just One. Neutral. Editor.
You say that there are numerous sources "saying the opposite"? Really? Really? Then why haven't you inserted them to provide the "balance" you say is lacking? Let us see your sources saying the opposite, that Djokvic is actually pro-vaccination. If they existed, you could have solved this imaginary problem and removed your own unnecessary template.
I think your coatrack argument is disingenuous, but like the balance issue, you could fix what you claim is a problem by changing the section title yourself. You say we have no information about his general "habits regarding the vaccine". That doesn't even make logical sense. No one on the entire planet has "habits" regarding a vaccine that has not yet been developed. You are just making stuff up.
I'm ready to remove the template, but I'll wait a few days to see if anyone weighs in and proffers some support to your position, someone to explain what it is I am missing. Unschool 02:38, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
The two undue weight templates are ridiculous. Barely a blip in the article and has been keyed upon in multiple tennis articles. Those templates should go. The template that says "This section's representation of one or more viewpoints about a controversial issue may be unbalanced or inaccurate" is at least a template that can be talked about. The inaccurate aspect of the template is wrong... It's accurate. Could it be shortened or re-balanced, sure. It looks ok to me but how about something written here that's constructive with the exact wording of what you'd like it changed to to make it balanced? Fyunck(click) (talk) 06:34, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for your comments, Fyunck. Am I correct in assuming that your question at the end of your comment is directed to WEBDuB, who posted the template? Unschool 12:58, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
Yes. Fyunck(click) (talk) 19:11, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
The templates can be removed after consensus. How about something written here that's constructive with the exact wording of what you'd like it changed to to make it balanced? If we are talking about the Adria Tour, then we should mention numerous statements of tennis players and other public figures about Novak's good intentions to organize a charity event, to enable young and low-ranking players to play and earn during the pause, to unite the Balkan region etc. Also, we should mention that the tournaments were organized in accordance with the measures issued by the Serbian and Croatian government, as well as numerous claims that Novak is not to blame for the spread of the epidemic during the tournament, but that the authorities lift precautionary measures too soon. It is really obvious that the section is unbalanced. A neutral characterization of disputes requires presenting viewpoints with a consistently impartial tone.
Most importantly, what does all this have to do with the vaccine hesitancy? The title and content of the section do not match. The title itself is especially UNDUE. There was no anti-vax activism, but only one statement about a possible decision in the future during a specific situation. That is not enough to make a separate section about the alleged vaccine hesitancy. No one on the entire planet has "habits" regarding a vaccine that has not yet been developed. - The title of the section suggests that Djokovic is generally opposed to the vaccine, which is the main problem here. If you are interested, you can make a section on Novak's health life, diet and similar (a lot has been written in the media about it), and than add a position on the COVID-19 vaccine.
@Unschool: I'm sorry if you felt offended or anything like that. I only anted to emphasize that it is important to be careful about the content in articles about living people. The attack on Seles was preceded by numerous negative media campaigns, huge headlines about grunting, etc. Even Navratilova explained that there are political prejudices in the tennis related media, especially towards Slavic and former communist countries. Therefore, we need to be careful how we choose the sources and formulate the context of the article.--WEBDuB (talk) 22:14, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
Actually, templates can be removed if they are blatantly false, and two of the three are. Fyunck(click) (talk) 04:54, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
@WEBDuB: Dude, I gotta tell you, you're not making any sense to me. Here's my offer: You speak of the imbalance, of the sources and information that would make it balanced, etc, etc. So do it. You show us what you think a balanced and well-written section would look like. Because I think it's fine. Fyunck thinks it's fine. So I think the templates can go, now. But you've got your chance. We're waiting. But not forever. Unschool 14:18, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
No, such a section should not even exist. Especially not with a title like this, which doesn't even refer to the content. The template should remain. A section should either be rearranged or removed. No one answered the question of what the Adria Tour has to do with the vaccine hesitancy.--WEBDuB (talk) 14:35, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
One of the world's top tennis players indicates that he is so uncertain about a potential vaccine that he would consider giving up the pro tour--you don't think that deserves mention? Hmmm, I think I see where the lack of balance is. Unschool 15:21, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
And we ask for exact wording and the entire section gets gutted? I put it back but moved the part about the tour into the 2020 tennis section. I did that before but I guess it got moved back. Fyunck(click) (talk) 18:35, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

If the source is not specific about covid-19 vaccine then we shouldn't be either. Per the source given and others I'm looking at, Djokovic said he is against vaccinations, not just covid-19 vaccinations. I don't see where he is specific. Fyunck(click) (talk) 21:28, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

The context is specific, the whole conversation as well. In particular, they talked about the COVID-19 pandemic. Taking sentences out of context is POV. Per BLP, It is not ok to label someone as anti-vaxer without knowing more information about attitudes and habits. Certainly, I think we have solved everything now.--WEBDuB (talk) 22:05, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
Per the sources given, being specific that it is only covid-19 is wrong. Fyunck(click) (talk) 22:13, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
I'm good with the current version of the article. Unschool 04:49, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
The context is lacking. I'm not good with the current version of the article. Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 16:45, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
Did you prefer the version that existed before this discussion started? Unschool 03:32, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

RfC: Should the information about ethnicity and place of birth of Novak Djoković mother be part of the article?

Should the information about Dijana Žagar ethnicity and place of birth be part of article and "Early and personal life" section. Mikola22 (talk) 07:38, 6 August 2020 (UTC) At this point we have two confirmed sources on RSN as reliable sources. First is from 2006 and interview of Novak Djokovic in Croatian newspaper Slobodna Dalmacija, "I da mi je majka Hrvatica, iako je rođena u Beogradu, jer su svi njezini iz Vinkovaca i tamo imam puno rodbine...And that my mother is Croat, even though she was born in Belgrade, because all of her are from Vinkovci and I have a lot of relatives there".[23] And new Serbian Nova S source from 2020 in which father of Dijana Žagar, Zdenko Žagar (82), says "Ja sam po nacionalnosti Hrvat i rođen sam u Vinkovcima..I am a Croat by nationality(origin) and I was born in Vinkovci"... "Uvek sam govorio da sam Jugosloven ili Hrvat, Srbin nikad nisam bio. Dijana je rođena u Beogradu i tu je odrasla...I always said that I was a Yugoslav or a Croat, I was never a Serb. Diana was born in Belgrade and grew up there..Normalno je da će biti više priklonjen Srbima i ja nemam ništa protiv toga. Ne bi bolje prošao u životu ni da se predstavlja kao Hrvat. It is normal that he(Novak) will be more in favor of Serbs, and I have nothing against that. He would not have fared better in life if he had presented himself as a Croat.[24]

This RfC is only for information about the mother. Secondly we have one questions and one proposal.

1) Whether you want that information about the mother's ethnicity and place of birth be part of this article? Yes or No. 2) I suggest that new information based on two RS be "Novak's mother Dijana Žagar is a Croat, born in Belgrade." If you answered the first question No this means that you are also against proposal 2), and more detailed explanations are no longer needed. Mikola22 (talk) 07:38, 6 August 2020 (UTC)


  • 1) Yes Because I think that ethnicity and place of birth mother or father of some famous person ie informations from private life must be part of this or any other article. 2) I agree with this proposal because information is from reliable sources which we must respect. Mikola22 (talk) 07:40, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose - The information itself is not a problem, but we do not have the good sources. There was no consensus on the RSN. According to WP:BLP: Be very firm about the use of high-quality sources. All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be supported by an inline citation to a reliable, published source.
  • Slobodna Dalmacija may be reliable, but that does not mean that it is always neutral. (WP:NEUTRALSOURCE) I think we should find a Serbian reliable portal that states the same claim and also to find a English source that explicitly uses the term Croat and not to translate arbitrarily.
Serbian: Hrvat (Хрват) = ethnic Croat, citizen of Croatia; Srbin (Србин) = ethnic Serb, citizen of Serbia
Croatian: Hrvat = both ethnic Croat and citizen of Croatia; Srbin = ethnic Serb; Srbijanac = citizen of Serbia
Furthermore, this is source from 2006. (WP:AGE MATTERS) Djokovic is a world-famous star who is in the media almost every day, there would certainly be a huge number of reliable sources of recent date in many languages ​​for any important information about him. People can say all sorts of things about themselves, sometimes contradictory things. Any statements made by interviewees about themselves, their activities, or anything they are connected to is considered to have come from a primary-source and is non-independent material. (WP:INTERVIEW)
  • The Nova S interview is RS, but Djokovic's grandfather said that he has always declared himself a Croat or Yugoslav. That’s all we know about his maternal ethnic background. That should not be neglected. It is estimated that there are about 400,000 ethnic Yugoslavs today. If we cite one fact from the source, then we must mention other.

I’m sorry to repeat myself, but I didn’t expect to have another one discussion. Let it remain here summarized.--WEBDuB (talk) 09:24, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

The Nova S interview is RS, but Djokovic's grandfather said that he has always declared himself a Croat or Yugoslav. The source does not say "declared" source say "said" (I always said that I was). He could say (Croat-Yugoslav) as an officer of the Yugoslav People's Army in some cafe or in public. Otherwise you can’t be declared twice for the same thing and in the same time. That is why he clearly says earlier that he is of Croatian nationality ie ethnic origin. By the way, Josip Broz Tito declared himself a Yugoslav and in the article he is "Ethnicity Croatian". Mikola22 (talk) 11:14, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
I really think you're using the wrong comparisons. It is only correct to say that Josip Broz Tito had Croatian ethnic origin, but everyone has the right to declare themselves as they wish.--WEBDuB (talk) 13:22, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose - ethnicity of Djokovic's mother and the back-and-forth it causes are trivial. If we have a reliable source as to where she was born that would be ok to place in the article. But this is an encyclopedic article summary of Novak Djokovic... not his parents. You mention them of course, but most articles don't go into detail about the genealogy of parents and grandparents. That's way too trivial here. Fyunck(click) (talk) 10:13, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
Comment Actually incorrect. Most articles will discuss a subjects various ethnic makeups. Even mentioning different parts of family lineage. So leaving out the part Croat heritage is very strange as this isn’t done with other athletes, actors, politicians and so on. There is RS confirming ethnic Croat and Serb background. OyMosby (talk) 07:08, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
A politician may be different, but most articles do not go into grandparents ethnicity and family trees... especially tennis articles. Parents names is what most people need. Fyunck(click) (talk) 07:35, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
Its like this for celebrities. They mention parents and grandparents as well as various ethnic mixes and lineages. It is not strange to mention the ethnicity of parents or grandparents. OyMosby (talk) 07:58, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
No, it is very strange to do so. You look at Serena Williams, Rafael Nadal, Steffi Graf.... you may not even get where the parents were born and certainly not ethnic background. That is trivial stuff for this article. Fyunck(click) (talk) 08:12, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
When I started RfC about Roger Federer, Pete Sampras, Jelena Dokic, Zlatan Ibrahimović etc I hope I will get support from you. Mikola22 (talk) 21:05, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose - Since you are suggesting to put only his mother ethnicty, I find this information incomplete and that it also implies on something that Novak himself is not. Also we don't have enough RS (only the TV show on Happy TV was recognised as primary but RS on RSN) and as my last argument most of the newspapers in the region are not reliable source as you can see in this study made on Croatian, Bosnian and Montenegro newspapers [[25]] - It is said that for example (since you are using Croatian newspapers as source I am going to refer to a problem there) "by the rules of journalism it is required by news publishing that the author quotes at least 2 independent sources and for example some international media houses like Canadian Broadcast Company requires at least 3. In Croatia daily newspapers used only one source, and lots of the articles are used without sourcing. They had analysed 4 different daily newspaper (which names I'm not going to mention but you can see them in the study on page 16) and found out that in one newspaper 67.3 % of articles are used without source, and in other 3 the articles with only one source were found in 69.5 % , 81,3 % and 49.8 % respectively... " So in my opinion when we are using EX Yu newspapers as a source we should be extremely careful with informations ,support them with independent neutral foreign newspapers,interviews from Novak himself and from his family and possibly from biographies which are recognised as RS.

In this case regarding this information we have to few RS (only one in which his father speaks that he comes from "Serb tribes" and he does not mention his mother although it is common sense that Novak is half Serb-half Croat) and that is why I think that we should leave it like editor Fyunck(click) proposed without mentioning his ethnicity . -Theonewithreason (talk) 14:34, 06 August 2020 (UTC)

Father of Novak Djoković is not mentioned in this RfC because these sources also mention him as a Montenegrin and in Novak Djoković article he is Serbian, so this is a question for another RfC. Mikola22 (talk) 15:16, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
Well here you go then ,that means that those sources are unreliable ones, since his father is ethnic Kosovo Serb (as he mentioned that numerous times in recorded interviews and in the show which is recognised on RSN as RS) and croatian newspapers are ignoring that source, and also I don't think that anyone will support you in making 2 or 3 different RFCs on same subject regarding one information about his parents.What you are doing is implying -Theonewithreason (talk) 15:26, 06 August 2020 (UTC)
We have two RS which talk about Novak's father and as Montenegrin, it's a word of Novak Djoković and Zdenko Žagar(family). Why these sources would be "unreliable ones"? These sources are confirmed as reliable sources on RSN. Since the question of the father's origin is more complicated, this question is not for this RfC. As for 2 or 3 of mine RfC, I don't know what you're talking about?Mikola22 (talk) 15:40, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
Actually no they were not recognised on RSN as RS since on the first one you were the one who made a conclusion that it is a RS and editor WeBDuB disagreed ,there were no conclusion from slatersteven or the other editors with whom you made most of the discussion, on the other hand he did confirmed that the source from HAPPY TV is a RS when he wrote "primary but RS" and you didn't mentioned this source on this RFC ,also father's origin is not complicated everyone who knows something about history of that region and the current situation knows exactly what is Srdjan by ethnicity and why is he so vocal about that and what is his opinion about situation over there. There are lots of sources on that subject too and are quite easy to find, we could argue that it is more complicated his mothers side since we know almost nothing about her side of the family ,especially not 3 or 4 generations like it is described on his father's side and also knowing the fact that his grandma from mothers side is never mentioned (We know only that her name was Sanda without lastname) but again I try to be reasonable and to go with his "father Serb mother Croat" definition since the sources are implying that and again Srdjan definetly knows what he is.-Theonewithreason (talk) 16:00, 06 August 2020 (UTC)
Actually no they were not recognised on RSN as RS since on the first one you were the one who made a conclusion that it is a RS and editor WeBDuB disagreed Editor Slatersteven confirmed that it was RS, that is, he did not say anything against that source ie reliability. We have and old case from 2010 and one of two sources is Slobodna Dalmacija source. (Comment: The sources seem reliable but there are issues with the presentation of the materials because knowing the nationality of parents does not equate to claims of "ancestry". I'll take those up on the article talk page.)[26] Mikola22 (talk) 16:44, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
Again I disagree that was not a comment from editor Slatersteven and yes he also did not specifically said that it is RS it was your conclusion, on the other hand what you have now presented is an old Comment like you said from 2010. back when we had less information about Novak. In current time it is more clear that this statement is not true since we have more statements from Novak father and in the same comment it is written that it does not equals the claims of ancestry which shows that even back then there were questions about clarity of the written sentence.-Theonewithreason (talk) 16:57, 06 August 2020 (UTC)
You put it there Oppose,and here you are returning to the article Drazen Petrović [[27]] because he is a Serbian father, and here you do not agree that he is because the mother is Croatian. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.142.66.189 (talk) 23:06, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
Attacking people won’t get you very far. OyMosby (talk) 07:08, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Sort of Support - It is not trivial in respect to how any other article about a person is handled. It should be Serb From Montenegro on father’s side and Croat from Croatia on mother’s side. His nationality is Serbian. There is RS confirming this. A book even. There problem solved like any other article. But Balkan related articles mist always be drama. What is the big deal about Croat heritage? Doesn’t make him any less Serbian. OyMosby (talk) 07:02, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
Since the RFC is posted in the way just to highlight his mother side, it is baised and ignores informations about his father meaning it ignores full information and RS . Like you said it should be posted Serb on father side and Croat on mother since Novak ethnical heritage is Serbian on his father side. I've never seen a RFC constructed like this way before.-Theonewithreason (talk) 07:40, 07 August 2020 (UTC)
I agree with you. This is all getting far more complicated than necessary. RfC should be better formulated. OyMosby (talk) 08:00, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
We cannot "solve" the father's side now because he is mentioned in these sources as a Montenegrin. Everyone after this RfC can start RfC concerning his father. It's now complicated and with father it would be even more complicated. Mikola22 (talk) 08:50, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
Again ,the problem of this RFC is that is constructed in a biased way, there is no problem about his father ethnicity since the RS that you ignored mentions him as a Serb and the source you posted here from Slobodna Dalmacija was never cleared as RS on RSN, that was your conclusion. About complication excuse me but you are the one who makes it complicated ,there was a perfectly good explanation in the article that was on for more than 2 years explaining that "his father was of Serbian and mother of Croatian descent" ,you are the one who didn't like it and were contradicting everybody on this talk page, everybody can scroll up and see it because you searched for a RS that describes exactly the word "descent" eventhough everybody told you that it is the same meaning with ethnicity and even expands the meaning , now we have the situaton that this RFC is ignoring RS from one side just to push contorversy. So please, it is not complicated that much it requires just a little bit of common sense.-Theonewithreason (talk) 09:07, 07 August 2020 (UTC)
Comment – Can somebody explain to me why this is controversial at all aside from trivial banter? Mhare (talk) 08:42, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Important Notice@Sadko, OyMosby, Theonewithreason, Fyunck(click), 93.142.66.189, and WEBDuB: This RfC has two questions. If you are opposed this mean that you are against and 1) question ie adding information about the mother's ethnicity and place of birth in this article. Information about the mother are from two confirmed RS and this mean(if this RfC does not accept my question) that these sources can no longer be part of the article. It also means that in future in similare RfCs you must have a consistent attitude ie opinion since we didn’t come here to play. We must be consistent and responsible. Thank you for your understanding. Mikola22 (talk) 09:12, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment Sadly enough this RfC is a sorty of a manipulation, written in order to be a win/win situation and we all know it. It's an example how not to start a RfC. Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 16:46, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
    Editor Fyunck(click) said that information(mother informations) are not important for the article. Because of that I asked the first question. There is no win/win situation, you can say 1) yes, it should be part of the article because they are reliable sources and I agree that informations (of this type) be part of this or any other article. And then for the second proposal you should give your opinion, whether you agree or disagree with the proposal. These two sources are reliable sources and now they are not part of the article? If someone wants these sources just for the place of birth(mother) then this edit violates the Wikipedia rule. ((NPOV), which means representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic.) We cannot use only one information from the source. Mikola22 (talk) 18:04, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
    I didn't say all mothers info is not important. I said this is a Novak Djokovic encyclopedia tennis entry. In the personal life section it is natural to mention where he was born and his father and mother's name. Sopmetime's in tennis articles we mention where the father and mother were born. but that's about it. It is unusual in tennis articles to start digging into family heritage on grandparents sides of the family. That is way too trivial imho. Plus we seem to have conflicting mentions in sources that cause some issues anyway. That is why I like it clean with parents names and where they were born and leave it to our readers to check the listed sources if they want more than that. Fyunck(click) (talk) 18:42, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
    You don't see that Slobodna Dalmacija RS(confirmed in 2010 as RS) is not part of the article. Even now is not part of the article. What's the problem? It is forbidden enter RS in the article in which are mentioned his Croatian mother? In any case, if this RfC end negatively this sources will not be part of this article even though they are RS, and we will respect that. But we (after RfC ends) will at least know that officially and finally. Mikola22 (talk) 20:52, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
    If we know 100% (from multiple sources) that Dijana was born in Belgrade, then of course it can be added. But this weird RfC is different than that so it cannot be supported. We have reliable sources that tell us Serena Williams shoe size but we don't put it in the article just because we have sources. You mention parents names if you know them, you "might" mention parents

birth cities (though that doesn't really pertain much to Novak). That's about it. If one parent acted as a coach of course that gets mentioned too. But it should mostly be where Novak was born, where he grew up, when he started playing tennis, when he won his first event... not about his parents. That's for a biography book. Fyunck(click) (talk) 21:37, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Novak_Djokovic/Archive_8&oldid=1137051483"